"I am just out of high school now, so my knowledge base is pretty small. But after reading this article, I just have a feeling that the answer to the question about free will might well lay outside the limits of our understanding, I mean, the question itself makes very little sense.
I'll try to explain my point using the human decision making process (because I really can't give you examples of quantum mechanical experiments like the ones mentioned above). Say for instance, I find myself in a situation, where there are certain things I need to keep in mind (initial conditions) and I have a number of options to choose from. And say that I finally go with one option. This of course, looks like an ideal scenario of free will, I could have chosen anything. I had the complete freedom to choose anyone, and which I did.
But if we look closely, my choice would have actually been influenced by a number of factors, and so the number of choices would have come down that way. Even then, the reason why I chose one of those remaining options is because I had a certain idea about "the best option", based on the initial conditions. So then, does that not look as though my choice was in fact pre-determined all along, and that given the same situation, I would go for the same choice every time. But this would contradict the whole probability issue, or would it? I mean, even if each of the choices that were presented to me, had certain probabilities of being chosen, in reality, it looks like only the best one was chosen. And that makes sense, considering those "initial conditions".
Now the question arises, that what would happen if this "experiment" were repeated many times. Certainly I can say that the same choice would be chosen over and over again, and though I know this violates that probability perspective, this is what makes sense, because, in reality, if something is occurring, then that must have come as a result of some sort of natural selection (or so i think) . But then, doesn't this propose contradictory arguments? What we are trying to do is trying to decide how a choice was made. And all the information that we can possibly gather, is that about what the choice that was ultimately made was. So, all we can do is speculate ways in which that choice came about, but there's no way to prove them. And knowing whether there is free will or no is certainly not going to impact our actions in any way. Then, isn't this question of whether there is free will in reality, just pointless??
"I am just out of high school now, so my knowledge base is pretty small. But after reading this article, I just have a feeling that the answer to the question about free will might well lay outside the limits of our understanding, I mean, the question itself makes very little sense.
I'll try to explain my point using the human decision making process (because I really can't give you examples of quantum mechanical experiments like the ones mentioned above). Say for instance, I find myself in a situation, where there are certain things I need to keep in mind (initial conditions) and I have a number of options to choose from. And say that I finally go with one option. This of course, looks like an ideal scenario of free will, I could have chosen anything. I had the complete freedom to choose anyone, and which I did.
But if we look closely, my choice would have actually been influenced by a number of factors, and so the number of choices would have come down that way. Even then, the reason why I chose one of those remaining options is because I had a certain idea about "the best option", based on the initial conditions. So then, does that not look as though my choice was in fact pre-determined all along, and that given the same situation, I would go for the same choice every time. But this would contradict the whole probability issue, or would it? I mean, even if each of the choices that were presented to me, had certain probabilities of being chosen, in reality, it looks like only the best one was chosen. And that makes sense, considering those "initial conditions".
Now the question arises, that what would happen if this "experiment" were repeated many times. Certainly I can say that the same choice would be chosen over and over again, and though I know this violates that probability perspective, this is what makes sense, because, in reality, if something is occurring, then that must have come as a result of some sort of natural selection (or so i think) . But then, doesn't this propose contradictory arguments? What we are trying to do is trying to decide how a choice was made. And all the information that we can possibly gather, is that about what the choice that was ultimately made was. So, all we can do is speculate ways in which that choice came about, but there's no way to prove them. And knowing whether there is free will or no is certainly not going to impact our actions in any way. Then, isn't this question of whether there is free will in reality, just pointless??